And now I propose to show in what way he made those who were with him
more vigorous in action.[1] In the first place, as befitted one whose
creed was that a basis of self-command is indispensable to any noble
performance, he manifested himself to his companions as one who had
pre-eminently disciplined himself;[2] and in the next place by
conversation and discussion he encouraged them to a like self-
restraint beyond all others.[3] Thus it was that he continued ever
mindful himself, and was continually reminding all whom he
encountered, of matters conducive to virtue; as the following
discussion with Euthydemus, which has come to my knowledge,[4] will
serve to illustrate--the topic of the discussion being self-command.

Tell me, Euthydemus (he began), do you believe freedom to be a noble
and magnificent acquisition, whether for a man or for a state?

Socrates. And does it not appear to you that this same beldame incontinence
shuts out wisdom, which is the best of all things,[6] from mankind,
and plunges them into the opposite? Does it not appear to you that she
hinders men from attending to things which will be of use and benefit,
and from learning to understand them; that she does so by dragging
them away to things which are pleasant; and often though they are well
aware of the good and of the evil, she amazes and confounds[7] their
wits and makes them choose the worse in place of the better?

Socrates. And[8] soundness of soul, the spirit of temperate modesty? Who
has less claim to this than the incontinent man? The works of the
temperate spirit and the works of incontinency are, I take it,
diametrically opposed?

Socrates. If this then be so concerning these virtues,[9] what with regard
to carefulness and devotion to all that ought to occupy us? Can
anything more seriously militate against these than this same
incontinence?

Socrates. And can worse befall a man, think you? Can he be subjected to a
more baleful influence than that which induces him to choose what is
hurtful in place of what is helpful; which cajoles him to devote
himself to the evil and to neglect the good; which forces him, will he
nill he, to do what every man in his sober senses would shrink from
and avoid?

Socrates. That, after all, incontinency is powerless to bring us to that
realm of sweetness which some look upon[10] as her peculiar province;
it is not incontinency but self-control alone which has the passport
to highest pleasures.

Why, this way (Socrates answered): since incontinency will not suffer
us to resist hunger and thirst, or to hold out against sexual
appetite, or want of sleep (which abstinences are the only channels to
true pleasure in eating and drinking, to the joys of love, to sweet
repose and blissful slumber won by those who will patiently abide and
endure till each particular happiness is at the flood)[11]--it comes
to this: by incontinency we are cut off from the full fruition of the
more obvious and constantly recurring pleasures.[12] To self-control,
which alone enables us to endure the pains aforesaid, alone belongs
the power to give us any pleasure worth remembering in these common
cases.

Socrates. Furthermore,[14] if there be any joy in learning aught "beautiful
and good," or in patient application to such rules as may enable a man
to manage his body aright, or to administer his household well, or to
prove himself useful to his friends and to the state, or to dominate
his enemies--which things are the sources not only of advantage but of
deepest satisifaction[15]--to the continent and self-controlled it is
given to reap the fruits of them in their performance. It is the
incontinent who have neither part nor lot in any one of them. Since we
must be right in asserting that he is least concerned with such things
who has least ability to do them, being tied down to take an interest
in the pleasure which is nearest to hand.

Euthydemus replied: Socrates, you would say, it seems to me, that a
man who is mastered by the pleasures of the body has no concern at all
with virtue.

And what is the distinction, Euthydemus (he asked), between a man
devoid of self-control and the dullest of brute beasts? A man who
foregoes all height of aim, who gives up searching for the best and
strives only to gratify his sense of pleasure,[16] is he better than
the silliest of cattle?[17] . . . But to the self-controlled alone is
it given to discover the hid treasures. These, by word and by deed,
they will pick out and make selection of them according to their
kinds, choosing deliberately the good and holding aloof from the
evil.[18] Thus (he added) it is that a man reaches the zenith, as it
were, of goodness and happiness, thus it is that he becomes most
capable of reasoning and discussion.[19] The very name discussion
({dialegesthai}) is got from people coming together and deliberating
in common by picking out and selecting things ({dialegein}) according
to their kinds.[20] A man then is bound to prepare himself as much as
possible for this business, and to pursue it beyond all else with
earnest resolution; for this is the right road to excellence, this
will make a man fittest to lead his fellows and be a master in
debate.[21]

[19] Or, "draws nearer to happiness and perfection, and is most
capable of truth-disclosing conversation." Cf. Plat. "Apol." 41:
"What would not a man give, O judges, to be able to examine the
leaders of the great Trojan expedition, or Odysseus, or Sisyphus,
or numberless others, men and women too! What infinite delight
would there be in conversing with them and asking them questions!"
(Jowett).